MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Blockchain–Cloud Integration for Cross-Border Invoice Factoring: A Secure and Scalable Framework for Sustainable Trade Finance

2025· article· W7154627141 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Palaniappan Sellappan, Kavitha Shanmugam, Varun Sarda, Vijay Arpudaraj Antonyaj

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScalabilityWork (physics)InvoiceKey (lock)SustainabilityPayment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cross-border trade finance supports liquidity and global supply chain growth, especially for small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Traditional documentation and invoice factoring systems face delays, huge documentation, fraud risks, poor interoperability, and limited transparency which results in unsustainable action. Blockchain-based trade finance improves immutability, decentralized validation, and automation through smart contracts. However, it suffers from scalability limitations, fragmented data management, and regulatory integration issues. Academic literature lacks a unified framework combining blockchain and cloud to address these operational gaps. This study fills the gap by evaluating traditional, blockchain, and hybrid models in trade finance systems. The paper reviews major use cases to understand realworld blockchain implementations in trade finance. These include HSBC and ING's blockchain letter of credit, and Bank of Canada's Project Jasper. UBS's blockchain payment initiative is also analyzed for its real-time settlement and auditability benefits. The study compares traditional and blockchain systems across speed, security, transparency, and integration parameters. It identifies that blockchain alone is insufficient due to its lack of scalability and limited system compatibility. To address this, the paper proposes a Blockchain-Cloud Integrated Trade Finance (TF) Framework. This includes hybrid data storage, Application Programming Interface (API) compliance, digital identity verification, and stakeholder dashboards. Using a design science approach, the framework improves auditability, transparency, and regulatory alignment. Findings benefit regulators, banks, and FinTech's. The framework not only enhances efficiency and compliance but also contributes to sustainable trade finance

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security→French-language works237,207→